Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 28th May 2013 12:59 UTC
Opera Software "Countless hours of hard work, hectoliters of coffee, tons of improvements, two version numbers skipped, and here it is: the all-new Opera for desktop is now out as an Opera Next version, Opera's channel for what used to be called beta. Made from scratch, this version is available for Windows and Mac and brings a new, elegant design and a bunch of new features that will make your browsing experience sleeker and easier than ever." The first version using something called 'Chromium's engine' - I guess they can't call it WebKit anymore, but they can't call it Blink yet either. It's looking great, but the bookmark functionality seems to not have been implemented yet in this preview
Order by: Score:
Chromium
by jacquouille on Tue 28th May 2013 13:14 UTC
jacquouille
Member since:
2006-01-02

The reason to call it "Chromium's engine" and not just Blink or WebKit, is that this is really far more than just Blink of WebKit. This is also v8, Chromium's GPU command buffer, Chromium's networking stack, etc.

Reply Score: 5

So
by peteo on Tue 28th May 2013 13:29 UTC
peteo
Member since:
2011-10-05

So I downloaded and gave it a spin.

It feels like I'm using a slightly inferior reskin of Chrome 28.

Opera is dead.

Reply Score: 1

RE: So
by jacquouille on Tue 28th May 2013 13:54 UTC in reply to "So"
jacquouille Member since:
2006-01-02

It feels like I'm using a slightly inferior reskin of Chrome 28.


Yes, that is what you're using.

Opera is dead.


Yes.

Opera's claims to contribute to Chromium are ridiculous. The whole reason for Blink is that Google found that not even Apple's contributions to WebKit were enough to offset the hassle of dealing with a shared browser engine. So there is no reason to expect that Google will be interested in the contributions of another company that is much smaller than Apple.

So yes, Opera will just be an irrelevant Chromium reskin.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: So
by Valhalla on Wed 29th May 2013 00:47 UTC in reply to "RE: So"
Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

As someone who never really used Opera I was under the impression that it was the innovative features (many of which was later implemented in other browsers) which set it apart, not the rendering engine.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: So
by cyrilleberger on Wed 29th May 2013 11:13 UTC in reply to "RE: So"
cyrilleberger Member since:
2006-02-01

The whole reason for Blink is that Google found that not even Apple's contributions to WebKit were enough to offset the hassle of dealing with a shared browser engine. So there is no reason to expect that Google will be interested in the contributions of another company that is much smaller than Apple.


Not quiet. Google was using Webkit1, while Apple was moving to Webkit2, and Google had no intention to moving from Webkit1 to Webkit2, since the main difference between the two is that Webkit2 uses several processes for rendering, while Webkit1 is single process. And Chrome uses a different multiprocess approach, and they had no attention of changing it. So in effect, Google was working on Webkit1, and Apple on Webkit2, and Google figured that it would be easier to just rename Webkit1 blink and not depend on Apple's webkit infrastructure.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: So
by PresentIt on Fri 31st May 2013 12:52 UTC in reply to "RE: So"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

Opera's claims to contribute to Chromium are ridiculous. The whole reason for Blink is that Google found that not even Apple's contributions to WebKit were enough to offset the hassle of dealing with a shared browser engine. So there is no reason to expect that Google will be interested in the contributions of another company that is much smaller than Apple.

Pure nonsense. Not only has Opera already contributed to Chromium, but Google welcomed them with open arms. They even mentioned Opera specifically in their Blink announcement!

Reply Score: 2

RE: So
by bhtooefr on Tue 28th May 2013 14:42 UTC in reply to "So"
bhtooefr Member since:
2009-02-19

I seriously hope they reinstitute Z-order for tab switching in later betas, rather than simplistic left to right.

Also, mouse button navigation isn't working.

Those two things are probably the biggest quirks that keep me on Opera, and this doesn't have them.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: So
by Doc Pain on Thu 30th May 2013 05:58 UTC in reply to "RE: So"
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

I seriously hope they reinstitute Z-order for tab switching in later betas, rather than simplistic left to right.

Also, mouse button navigation isn't working.

Those two things are probably the biggest quirks that keep me on Opera, and this doesn't have them.


Same here. I've been using Opera for many years now, I think since somewhere around version 5. I did always like the work Opera developers have been putting into delivering a user-friendly interface which emphasized excellent integration of mouse and keyboard. Mouse gestures and keyboard shortcuts made simple things easy. It felt like they had "invested brain power" to make things work smoothly. Maybe I'm just stupid, but I found competitors (Firefox, Safari, Chrome) not as "fast and easy" as Opera... yes I know, there are extensions, add-ins, add-ons and who knows what to enable "Opera-like" functions in those browsers, but Opera had them out of the box. :-)

Within the last years, I've been observing a significant decline in program functionality. The features of the file dialog (prefix to change directory, automatic appending of file extensions, editable directory hierarchy dropdown) and the printer generator, as well as (for some versions) the unneccessary coupling to CUPS (I don't have it, I don't need it, my printer speaks PS, thank you). And prior to using Opera, I had to configure more and more things.

I'm interested in seeing if the new "inner bowels" of the browser are able to provide a fast and modern browsing experience with the known and reliable "outer interface" many Opera users love so much (me included). Sadly, my OS is not on the list yet. :-)

Reply Score: 2

RE: So
by UltraZelda64 on Tue 28th May 2013 18:32 UTC in reply to "So"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

There's still time before it's actually released to, you know, (hopefully) improve it.

I'm not running Windows or Mac and I don't want to try Wine (which works half-ass, if at all, most of the time), so I'll just wait and see. Hopefully they can fully Opera-ify it. Opera *was* a really good browser.


Edit: From the article:

"...two version numbers skipped, ..."

Uhh... I really hope this is just a one-time thing and not a hint that they're going to pull the same version-jumping game that the Google and Mozilla are playing, bumping the major version number every time they take a shit to see who can count to 100 fastest...

Edited 2013-05-28 18:42 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: So
by Fergy on Thu 30th May 2013 07:53 UTC in reply to "RE: So"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

Uhh... I really hope this is just a one-time thing and not a hint that they're going to pull the same version-jumping game that the Google and Mozilla are playing, bumping the major version number every time they take a shit to see who can count to 100 fastest...

It has been six years since Chrome went to a rapid release cycle and you still haven't managed to get informed about it?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: So
by UltraZelda64 on Thu 30th May 2013 15:18 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: So"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

It has been six years since Chrome went to a rapid release cycle and you still haven't managed to get informed about it?

The fact that Chrome's closer to 100 and Mozilla just decided to be a Chrome wannabe shortly after its original release and popularity says it all. Let's see who hits 100 first and realizes that their versioning scheme is unsustainable, and has to switch to something new. Should be entertaining to see who has the bigger... eh, version numbers.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: So
by Fergy on Thu 30th May 2013 16:42 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: So"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

"It has been six years since Chrome went to a rapid release cycle and you still haven't managed to get informed about it?

The fact that Chrome's closer to 100 and Mozilla just decided to be a Chrome wannabe shortly after its original release and popularity says it all. Let's see who hits 100 first and realizes that their versioning scheme is unsustainable, and has to switch to something new. Should be entertaining to see who has the bigger... eh, version numbers.
"
You have so little understanding it is mindboggling.

Reply Score: 2

RE: So
by PresentIt on Tue 28th May 2013 18:37 UTC in reply to "So"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

Opera is dead.

Why? Because you didn't get to dictate how the new version was supposed to look?

Opera has more than 300 million users and record revenues and profits... Hardly sounds like a dead company.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: So
by Lurking_Grue on Wed 29th May 2013 16:26 UTC in reply to "RE: So"
Lurking_Grue Member since:
2013-03-15

Look, This isn't a few minor bits are missing. EVERY major feature that opera users like are gone.

It went from a power user browser to a cheap skin of Chrome.

Yes, The opera browser died. The company will probably go on but it lost most of it's userbase.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: So
by darknexus on Thu 30th May 2013 21:32 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: So"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

The company will probably go on but it lost most of it's userbase.

Don't worry. If things get too rough for them, they'll just be little babies and cry to the EU like they did the last time. I wonder if, this time, the EU will have enough sense to tell them where to put it.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: So
by PresentIt on Fri 31st May 2013 13:10 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: So"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

Don't worry. If things get too rough for them, they'll just be little babies and cry to the EU like they did the last time. I wonder if, this time, the EU will have enough sense to tell them where to put it.

So if you report a crime, you are a crybaby? Because that's what was done: Microsoft broke the law, and someone reported that to the authorities.

By the way, are Google, Mozilla, Adobe, etc. crybabies as well, since they joined the EC complaint?

The fact is that Microsoft was found in violation. So that tells YOU where to put it.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: So
by PresentIt on Fri 31st May 2013 12:59 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: So"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

Look, This isn't a few minor bits are missing. EVERY major feature that opera users like are gone.

False. Mouse gestures, Speed Dial and other things are still there.

It went from a power user browser to a cheap skin of Chrome.

False. This is just the first public version after rewriting the entire UI from scratch.

Yes, The opera browser died. The company will probably go on but it lost most of it's userbase.

How do you know? Do you know for a fact that all of Opera's tens of millions of users actually use all those features?

Or do you think that perhaps Opera has an idea about what features are actually popular? They do have usage stats, after all.

Reply Score: 2

Opera for Android
by sean on Tue 28th May 2013 14:54 UTC
sean
Member since:
2005-06-29

For those that are disappointed with the new Opera on Android, Opera released Opera Classic: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.opera.browser.clas...

I am thankful they did. The new version was slow enough on my phone (HTC Rezound) to be annoying. On my wife's phone (older technology), it was quite painful.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Opera for Android
by phoenix on Tue 28th May 2013 22:26 UTC in reply to "Opera for Android"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Yay! Now I can uninstall Opera, and can use "Update All" again in the Play Store.

The new Opera on Android has issues with CSS or fonts or something. For example, reading the comments on osnews.com in desktop mode is painful.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Opera for Android
by phoenix on Wed 29th May 2013 17:25 UTC in reply to "RE: Opera for Android"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Unfortunately, the Opera Classic install doesn't pick up the settings and saved info from the Opera install. ;)

But, at least now I have a working Opera that won't change to a non-working, Chrome-based Opera.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Coxy
by Coxy on Tue 28th May 2013 14:54 UTC
Coxy
Member since:
2006-07-01

Basically opera is now a skin for google's browser...

...I guess this means that even opera think ther browser was finished. How many users of browsers bother to change their browser's skin? Or even know or care what a "skin" is?

Opera's problem was that they concentrated too much on features for nerds and never advertised their browser enough... then firefox came a long - that was really the first nails going into opera's coffin.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Coxy
by einr on Tue 28th May 2013 15:01 UTC in reply to "Comment by Coxy"
einr Member since:
2012-02-15

Opera's problem was that they concentrated too much on features for nerds

That wasn't their "problem" as much as their niche, the thing they actually did well. Now all of those nerd features are gone (this thing is even less configurable than Chrome, astoundingly) so, well...

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by Coxy
by vaette on Tue 28th May 2013 15:01 UTC in reply to "Comment by Coxy"
vaette Member since:
2008-08-09

Chrome has gotten worse and worse for me, with weird lags and strange behavior, and dropping support for older Linux distributions at a rather disturbing rate. I trust Opera further than I trust Google to make a browser with an eye for the end-user. Certainly that is closer to their main motivation than it is to Googles.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by Coxy
by peteo on Wed 29th May 2013 09:56 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Coxy"
peteo Member since:
2011-10-05

Chrome has gotten worse and worse for me, with weird lags and strange behavior, and dropping support for older Linux distributions at a rather disturbing rate. I trust Opera further than I trust Google to make a browser with an eye for the end-user. Certainly that is closer to their main motivation than it is to Googles.


I clearly prefer Chrome, but me too have seen sudden lags and CPU peaks that wasn't there before. Hope they fix it.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Coxy
by PresentIt on Tue 28th May 2013 18:38 UTC in reply to "Comment by Coxy"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

Basically opera is now a skin for google's browser...

No it isn't. The interface was rewritten from the ground up, and is actually native, unlike Chrome, Firefox, and old Opera.

...I guess this means that even opera think ther browser was finished.

What are you talking about?

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Coxy
by phoenix on Tue 28th May 2013 22:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Coxy"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

"Basically opera is now a skin for google's browser...

No it isn't. The interface was rewritten from the ground up, and is actually native, unlike Chrome, Firefox, and old Opera.
"

How was Opera Classic's QT interface non-native?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by Coxy
by Hiev on Tue 28th May 2013 23:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Coxy"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

Qt doesn't use the native OS widgets, it creates their own and then use the skin of the OS, this work most of the time, but other times some controls look misplaced.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by Coxy
by zima on Wed 29th May 2013 11:53 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Coxy"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Opera was not based on Qt, but on its own toolkit: http://my.opera.com/kilsmo/blog/2008/01/29/opera-is-not-based-on-qt

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by Coxy
by phoenix on Wed 29th May 2013 17:24 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Coxy"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Hrm, interesting. Didn't realise they were using Qt without actually using Qt for the GUI.

Thanks for the info.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by Coxy
by zima on Tue 4th Jun 2013 18:02 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Coxy"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

And they were using Qt only on Linux, to interface with that platform (plus they stopped using it even for that from some point on, IIRC)

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Coxy
by Lurking_Grue on Wed 29th May 2013 16:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Coxy"
Lurking_Grue Member since:
2013-03-15

Explore the interface and you will find chrome.

View the source of a website and go in the dev tools and you can't tell the difference.

Same horrible chrome style settings pages.

If they were doing this from scratch they took way too much interface from Chrome and not enough Opera.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by Coxy
by PresentIt on Fri 31st May 2013 13:01 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Coxy"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

Explore the interface and you will find chrome.

False. Your examples prove your inability to understand what the user interface is.

View the source of a website and go in the dev tools and you can't tell the difference.

Same horrible chrome style settings pages.

These are not part of the UI. They are web page templates.

If they were doing this from scratch they took way too much interface from Chrome and not enough Opera.

Except you are not referring to user interface. You are talking about web pages/templates used in the browser. More of an engine thing. The actual UI is rewritten.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Coxy
by PresentIt on Fri 31st May 2013 12:51 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Coxy"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

How was Opera Classic's QT interface non-native?

Opera never used Qt on Windows and Mac, and not on Linux for the past few years. They used a non-native cross-platform toolkit called Quick. Regardless, Qt is not native either.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Coxy
by Coxy on Wed 29th May 2013 10:11 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Coxy"
Coxy Member since:
2006-07-01

As far as the user is concerned it's just a skin - they won't see any reason to use it.

What are you talking about?


If it's beyond your understanding, why did you comment?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by Coxy
by PresentIt on Fri 31st May 2013 12:55 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Coxy"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

As far as the user is concerned it's just a skin - they won't see any reason to use it.

A skin doesn't produce features like Off-Road, Speed Dial with folders, Discover and Stash. And that's just the first version after the rewrite. Imagine what you'll see a few versions down the line.

So claiming that it's just a skin is simply insanity.

If it's beyond your understanding, why did you comment?

Your comments are beyond sanity. Well into insanity land.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by judgen
by judgen on Tue 28th May 2013 15:11 UTC
judgen
Member since:
2006-07-12

I think i will keep Presto based Opera installed for a while longer atleast.
The benefits of the chromium base does not shine through yet for me atleast as a desktop user. Soon perhaps but this preview release is not it.

Reply Score: 3

Text to speech
by WorknMan on Tue 28th May 2013 15:36 UTC
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

Is text to speech ('voice') still there on the Windows version? I think they broke it way back around v10, but I haven't checked lately. Just wondering if they pulled it altogether.

Reply Score: 3

:(
by NuxRo on Tue 28th May 2013 19:54 UTC
NuxRo
Member since:
2010-09-25

I hope the upcoming releases will be on par with the current desktop version of Opera, with the same features. Otherwise, why use Opera over Chromium?

I hope they don't ruin Opera Mini any time soon, it's an absolute blessing on the mobiles!

Reply Score: 3

RE: :(
by PresentIt on Tue 28th May 2013 20:56 UTC in reply to ":("
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

I hope the upcoming releases will be on par with the current desktop version of Opera, with the same features. Otherwise, why use Opera over Chromium?

The only way a browser can be an alternative to Chrome is if it's exactly like Opera 12? Somehow that sounds a bit weird...

Reply Score: 2

RE: :(
by Hayoo! on Wed 29th May 2013 03:56 UTC in reply to ":("
Hayoo! Member since:
2013-04-13

I hope they don't ruin Opera Mini any time soon, it's an absolute blessing on the mobiles!

I don't see what's been ruined in Opera 15. It's unsatisfactory (to many) because it's still at preview stage. I think your worries come too early.

Personally, I don't care what engine Opera wants to use, as long as the Turbo/Off-Road feature will still do its job well. Turbo/Off-Road is the only reason I still use Opera sometimes, but only when high-speed connection is unavailable. Firefox/Iceweasel for serious browsing and W3m in TTY for recreational browsing are usually more than enough, at least for me.

Reply Score: 1

Good and bad
by ebasconp on Tue 28th May 2013 21:01 UTC
ebasconp
Member since:
2006-05-09

Hi,

actually I liked a lot the responsiveness of the browsing area itself but also missed a lot of features from very simple and not too useful (for example, the slider bar in the right bottom to change the zoom of the page) to very useful and important (bookmarks, Opera Link or things like that).

Actually I thought they were to change just the rendering engine and let everything as is, but we all know that that was not the point.

So, let's wait after the Opera 15 release to see if the Opera guys start to put into the browser all the things that made Opera different from the others.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Good and bad
by ebasconp on Wed 29th May 2013 03:08 UTC in reply to "Good and bad"
ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

Actually, after using Opera 15 for some hours, I like it; it is pretty fast, a lot of pages look far better than in Opera 12.15. Yes, a lot of things are missing but I really hope the Opera guys will add them gradually into their browser.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by antonone
by antonone on Wed 29th May 2013 07:17 UTC
antonone
Member since:
2006-02-03

New Opera looks like an end of an old era.

I've used Opera back in version 4-5 days. This just feels like an old engineering veteran is being recruited in a businessman position for a company founded by some 12-year old kid, whos dad was the owner of a TV station, so he could promote the kid over the whole country.

It's not a country for old men. It's just sad.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by antonone
by ebasconp on Wed 29th May 2013 14:18 UTC in reply to "Comment by antonone"
ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

See it from the other side:

Yes, it is the end of an era, but the beginning of other one. Let's no blame Opera until we will see what they will bring us in the future.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by antonone
by Fergy on Thu 30th May 2013 07:51 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by antonone"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

See it from the other side:

Yes, it is the end of an era, but the beginning of other one. Let's no blame Opera until we will see what they will bring us in the future.

We all can see what their plan is. Base your browser on Chromium so you have a fast browser without any risk. Add a few features that make you browser 'unique'. They will of course lose most Opera 12 users that went with Opera because of the innovative features. They will gain Chrome users that like the new features they implement.
Overall a low risk solution for Opera.

I wonder how much Opera will still be a player in building the internet like they did with CSS.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by antonone
by antonone on Thu 30th May 2013 12:35 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by antonone"
antonone Member since:
2006-02-03

Yes, I don't have any other option than to look at this in this way ;)

Also I kind of hoped that all they change is the rendering engine, and the rest will stay as before. It seems that it's not possible to just "replace" the viewing widget and leave the rest.

That said, I'll probably stay interested in what Opera will offer and I will be checking out their new versions of Chrome distribution.

Reply Score: 1

Unsurprising, but still depressing
by Dave_K on Wed 29th May 2013 13:04 UTC
Dave_K
Member since:
2005-11-16

It looks like the "doom mongers" were right about Opera's new direction. It used to be the most highly customisable "power user" browser around, with a lot of unique features to set it apart. Now it's becoming a stripped down mobile browser that just happens to have a desktop version. I see no indication that this is going to change between preview and full release.

I guess that explains why so many of Opera's advanced features haven't been updated (or even bug fixed) in recent versions. There wasn't much point in improving them when they were going to be removed from the browser completely.

Opera was the one browser I could tweak and customise to meet my preferences near perfectly. There's still nothing on the market on a par with classic Opera for management of multiple tabs, and along with features like the Notes panel, that often made Opera a significantly superior research tool. For me, any other browser I switch to will be a downgrade.

Obviously its desktop niche was too small and they're trying a different direction, but as someone who's used Opera since version 2 I'm really going to miss the browser.

Reply Score: 3

PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

Now it's becoming a stripped down mobile browser that just happens to have a desktop version. I see no indication that this is going to change between preview and full release.

You are missing the point. They rewrite the UI from scratch. This is just the first step. They're not going to stop adding features.

Opera 15 is the foundation. It isn't becoming stripped down. It is stripped down now because it's physically impossible to add tons of features in such a short amount of time. But it will be less stripped down as it matures.

Reply Score: 2

Dave_K Member since:
2005-11-16

You are missing the point. They rewrite the UI from scratch. This is just the first step. They're not going to stop adding features.


I'm sure they're going to add to it, just like Microsoft will be adding extra features to Modern UI, but that doesn't mean that all the classic UI features and customisability will ever be reimplemented.

I'd be less worried if some of Opera's niche features hadn't been broken/abandoned even before this rewrite. To me it seems to be following a trend where Opera are copying the simplicity of Chrome, rather than providing a flexible browser for users who value a lot of advanced features.

The depressing thing is that Opera staff who've commented don't even seem to get what people are complaining about...

Reply Score: 2

PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

I'm sure they're going to add to it, just like Microsoft will be adding extra features to Modern UI, but that doesn't mean that all the classic UI features and customisability will ever be reimplemented.

I'd be less worried if some of Opera's niche features hadn't been broken/abandoned even before this rewrite. To me it seems to be following a trend where Opera are copying the simplicity of Chrome, rather than providing a flexible browser for users who value a lot of advanced features.

Again: You are missing the point. They rewrite the UI from scratch. This is just the first step. They're not going to stop adding features.

You just ignored what I wrote about this just being the first version, and that the first version obviously isn't going to have tons of features.

They need to get the basics right before they start adding all sorts of stuff.

The depressing thing is that Opera staff who've commented don't even seem to get what people are complaining about...

How so?

Edited 2013-06-01 17:46 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Dave_K Member since:
2005-11-16

You just ignored what I wrote about this just being the first version, and that the first version obviously isn't going to have tons of features.


That comment's ironic considering the fact that you've completely ignored what I wrote. My point was that the trend towards Opera becoming less customisable and abandoning features started before this rewrite. That doesn't exactly fill me with confidence that the full Opera UI will return.

When people have brought up niche features, such as MDI abilities like tiling tabs, I've seen Opera staff question how important they are and talk about "streamlining" the browser's features to those that people "really use".

Opera 15 is the first version of Opera not to allow complete customisation of the browser's layout, as well as all menus and keyboard shortcuts. Again, I've seen the popularity and importance of this questioned, which doesn't make it sound like Opera 15 will regain that high level of customisability.

Considering their limited resources, it would make sense for Opera to focus on the most popular features and abandon development of things that relatively few people care about. But for me some of those features are among the main reasons why I started using Opera over 15 years ago.

Would you bet that all the niche features that made Opera unique will ever return in future versions?

Reply Score: 2

PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

That doesn't exactly fill me with confidence that the full Opera UI will return.

I sure hope it won't. It was far too complex, causing all kinds of weird regressions. Fixing something in one spot would break something somewhere else because the UI was insanely complex and flexible, and everything tied tightly together.

That shit just doesn't scale. And it was only getting worse.

When people have brought up niche features, such as MDI abilities like tiling tabs, I've seen Opera staff question how important they are and talk about "streamlining" the browser's features to those that people "really use".

So? That doesn't mean they don't understand what people are complaining about. It simply means that they disagree with them. And Opera has actual data on what people are using the browser for, remember.

Would you bet that all the niche features that made Opera unique will ever return in future versions?

They shouldn't. Opera should focus on adding quality features. Quality over quantity.

Reply Score: 2

Dave_K Member since:
2005-11-16

I sure hope it won't. It was far too complex, causing all kinds of weird regressions. Fixing something in one spot would break something somewhere else because the UI was insanely complex and flexible, and everything tied tightly together.


Even if that's true (which, if it is, doesn't say much about the abilities of Opera devs, considering how much more complicated many other applications' UIs are), it's irrelevant to anything I've said.

I'm just speaking about myself, my preferences, and how I feel about Opera's changes. Try to read and comprehend that.

I haven't been saying what Opera should do. I haven't been commenting that they're making a mistake from a business perspective. I'm just pointing out that Opera is becoming less feature rich and customisable (something that you now seem to be agreeing with me about), and commenting that I'm going to miss the browser that Opera used to be.

They shouldn't. Opera should focus on adding quality features. Quality over quantity.


My idea of a "quality" feature will probably be different from yours, or that of the current Opera developers.

Quantity (and customisability) has a quality all of its own, allowing for choice and individual preference in a way that a small selection of "quality" features does not. If I wanted to use a stripped down browser with a limited selection of features then I'd already be using one.

Personally, I use Opera because I can customise it to meet my preferences, heavily tweaking the layout of the browser so that it's extremely minimalist and just has the features I use. When researching a subject, or even just shopping online and reading reviews, I find certain unique Opera features like MDI/tiling to be extremely useful. If I can't do these things in Opera then I'll switch to something like Firefox, and take the extra selection of useful extensions as a consolation.

No, I'm not saying that Opera devs should care about my preferences, or whether one long term user abandons the browser. I'm just speaking from my perspective as someone who loves Opera's current features and will be sad to have to use something that's inferior for my needs.

Like I said in the post title, from my perspective it's unsurprising, but still depressing.

Reply Score: 2

How to stop Opera
by libray on Wed 29th May 2013 22:01 UTC
libray
Member since:
2005-08-27

I added these to my Unbound recursive DNS configuration file which work pretty well.

# Opera
do-not-query-address: 213.236.208.0/24
do-not-query-address: 195.189.143.0/24
do-not-query-address: 64.255.180.0/24
do-not-query-address: 88.131.66.0/24
# Opera 10/30/2011
do-not-query-address: 82.145.208.0/20
do-not-query-address: 141.0.8.0/21
# Opera 5/17/2013
do-not-query-address: 195.189.142.0/23
do-not-query-address: 37.228.104.0/21
do-not-query-address: 82.145.208.0/21
do-not-query-address: 141.0.13.0/24

Edited 2013-05-29 22:03 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: How to stop Opera
by PresentIt on Fri 31st May 2013 13:08 UTC in reply to "How to stop Opera"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

I added these to my Unbound recursive DNS configuration file which work pretty well.

Works well for what?

Reply Score: 2

Alpha
by Tuishimi on Wed 29th May 2013 22:24 UTC
Tuishimi
Member since:
2005-07-06

It's alpha. It's just the beginning of what they hope to roll out, I am sure. Give them a little time and see what comes of it before going all doom and gloom.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Alpha
by Kochise on Thu 30th May 2013 10:42 UTC in reply to "Alpha"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Alpha or not, I'm not going anymore with any Opera Diluted release. Since desktop version 12 Opera hangs on certain sites (don't know if it's the extensions that breaks things or not) but Opera still claims everything is fine while hundreds of users scream at them that : NO, definitively NO, not everything is perfect. Far from.

In desktop version 11 that introduced, pardon me... pushed down users' throat the new "visual mouse gesture" with a new algorithm that made things really lame. There was a huge uproar on the forum and they release 3 versions before correcting this issue, always rejecting faults on users for their lack of adaptedness. Come on...

Sure they tweaked their Presto engine to run the Acid3 test first, but some site still renders strangely, and rejecting fault on webmasters is the easy path. The user don't give a f--k whose at fault, he just want to access the Internet flawlessly.

And now this : good they are using a more robust rendering engine (stop praising Presto, in the end it haven't impressed much otherwise Opera would have got much market share) but their are still experimenting with UI. Do we really need everything to change at each incarnation ?

Opera proudly introduced WebGL in late desktop version 11 betas and early 12 alphas, but it still can render only very simple WebGL. Their introduce things but not complete them afterward. So I'm getting really fed up of using long lasting alpha released as stable.

And don't get me on speaking about the M2 mail client that often breaks (on power outage) due to temporary files not being correctly flushed and original files corruption. Ability to recover from mail database corruption ? Almost none, not automated wizardry to recover mail files into accounts and resync everything, all what you have is an import file-by-file facility. Seriously...

/rant off

Kochise

Edited 2013-05-30 10:44 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Alpha
by Tuishimi on Thu 30th May 2013 14:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Alpha"
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

*hug*

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Alpha
by PresentIt on Fri 31st May 2013 13:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Alpha"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

Since desktop version 12 Opera hangs on certain sites (don't know if it's the extensions that breaks things or not) but Opera still claims everything is fine while hundreds of users scream at them that

Really? Proof, please. I want some specific examples of this.

There was a huge uproar on the forum and they release 3 versions before correcting this issue, always rejecting faults on users for their lack of adaptedness. Come on...

Really? They blamed the users? Proof, please. Otherwise one will have conclude that you are a liar.

Sure they tweaked their Presto engine to run the Acid3 test first, but some site still renders strangely, and rejecting fault on webmasters is the easy path. The user don't give a f--k whose at fault, he just want to access the Internet flawlessly.

This is a blatant lie. Opera doesn't blame the webmasters. They made Presto from scratch to be as compatible as possible. I don't know what your agenda is, lying about Opera like this, so maybe you could explain.

Why are you lying about Opera blaming other people?

but their are still experimenting with UI. Do we really need everything to change at each incarnation ?

Ok, now you are getting annoying. Do you not understand the concept of creating a UI from scratch? Are you so ignorant of software development that you don't understand that you can't implement a hundred features in a few days?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Alpha
by Kochise on Fri 31st May 2013 15:25 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Alpha"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Hmmm, the Opera forum is full of proofs, I won't waste my time pointing them out to you, the last time I did the opponent, obviously moved and unable to come with counter argument just ditched the proofs away.

I liked Opera up to version 12, but things really came downhill since version 10.

You can call me liar all you want, you can praise Opera from making Presto from ground up, compliant, whatever, nonetheless it remains bad at rendering several sites. And no, I won't list them either.

Just do a search on the french phone book :

http://www.pagesjaunes.fr/ like "garagiste" at "joigny" on Opera. Activate some extension or not.

http://hexgl.bkcore.com/ play with it on Opera

http://www.zephyrosanemos.com/windstorm/current/live-demo.html again, on Opera

Why do they have to reinvent the UI ? UI here, UI there, it's getting really ridiculous. All because Microsoft started its Modern UI stuff everybody follows like sheeps ? Google made it for Android, Apple make it for iOS 7, etc...

Kochise

Edited 2013-05-31 15:28 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Alpha
by zima on Sat 1st Jun 2013 13:10 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Alpha"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

I liked Opera up to version 12, but things really came downhill since version 10.

Hm, though peole were saying things like that since forever, with pretty much every version - it would seem that Opera was getting only worse since version 1. ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Alpha
by Kochise on Sat 1st Jun 2013 14:28 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Alpha"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Nope, I discovered Opera at version 6, and growing to version 9 to 10, it was almost miraculous : news features added without almost anything breaking for one version to another. Version 10 was almost at the top, then things started to break, little by little.

It's hard to make an exhaustive listing of what happened, but while Opera improved in many areas, there was certain features that gone bad and obviously Opera wasn't very eager to correct them, if not to support them anymore.

Now they have done "a new UI from scratch". First, it's just an UI, it's not a complete rendering engine. Second, they already had an UI, one of the best that made me choose Opera above many opponents (that copied Opera step by step). So why, instead to improve the original experience, they decided to abandon it altogether ?

Here we are : Opera had a very good UI, a pretty nice rendering engine. Now they decided to use a very good engine and are just messing with a new UI like newbies with no previous experience. Reinventing the wheel is not a good option some days. See Microsoft's attempt with Modern UI, could Opera bear to experience the same fiasco ?

Kochise

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Alpha
by PresentIt on Sat 1st Jun 2013 17:45 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Alpha"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

You discovered Opera at version 6, and yet people claimed that Opera 6 was the worst version ever. Then they claimed that Opera 6 was. Then Opera 8. Then 9. Then 10. Then 11. Then 12.

Of course, people made the same claim about Opera 5, 4, etc.

It's just BS. People are making the same claims about every single new version -- "worst ever" blah blah.

So why, instead to improve the original experience, they decided to abandon it altogether ?

Because they are using a new engine, and the old UI is too strongly tied to the engine.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Alpha
by zima on Tue 4th Jun 2013 15:28 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Alpha"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Well for me early 9 versions were "best" - the pinnacle being version 9.27.

Later 9 (after 9.27) and 10 were horrible, for me. 11 started being good again, and 12 is fine.

So, which one of us is right? Honestly, it's mostly BS as PresentIt says it - each version was "worst ever" for somebody.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Alpha
by PresentIt on Sat 1st Jun 2013 17:43 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Alpha"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

Hmmm, the Opera forum is full of proofs, I won't waste my time pointing them out to you, the last time I did the opponent, obviously moved and unable to come with counter argument just ditched the proofs away.

In other words, you have no proof. You only have the lies you made up.

If you had actual proof that Opera claims everything is fine and blamed the users, you would have posted it. But you don't, so that's proof that you lied.

You can call me liar all you want, you can praise Opera from making Presto from ground up, compliant, whatever, nonetheless it remains bad at rendering several sites. And no, I won't list them either.

That's not the question. You claimed that Opera only blamed sites, and I wanted proof. Because if you read official blogs they keep talking about how they're working on making Opera more compatible with the web, and they have said numerous times that Presto was designed to be compatible with real sites.

Why do they have to reinvent the UI ?

Because the old one was like this (see the pictures)?

http://www.favbrowser.com/opera-the-past-the-present-the-future/

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Alpha
by Kochise on Sat 1st Jun 2013 19:58 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Alpha"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

And again, I pointed web sites that actually renders badly under Opera, and whooops, you just "forgot" them ;) Tiresome...

And you expect me to point you "proofs" to be "forgotten" as well ? I won't waste my time, you're just this kind of rose-tainted glass people that cannot cope with criticism. There's really no use arguing with you, you'll always elude the evidence, telling... shouting how much a liar liar LIAAAAAR I am.

Be a man, live with it, Opera failed. They had a pretty honest success for their niche, but if they had to go Chrominium/Blink/whatever, then they must have concluded that the Presto way wasn't worth.

BTW you seems very impressed by articles. Yet, while Opera pretend to have made such an "entirely new and expansive foundation", they could just have configured the UI with all the features of the old one (including M2). And there is also UI frameworks available, is that really necessary to produce another incarnation/fragmentation ?

Kochise

Edited 2013-06-01 20:03 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Alpha
by PresentIt on Sat 1st Jun 2013 20:55 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Alpha"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

And again, I pointed web sites that actually renders badly under Opera, and whooops, you just "forgot" them ;) Tiresome...

That wasn't what I asked you about. Site problems is one of the reason they are switching in the first place.

What YOU need to prove is that they are blaming the sites.

BTW you seems very impressed by articles. Yet, while Opera pretend to have made such an "entirely new and expansive foundation", they could just have configured the UI with all the features of the old one (including M2).

No they couldn't. You are incredibly ignorant.

But back to the topic: You lied about Opera blaming the users, and you lied about Opera only blaming sites.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Alpha
by Kochise on Sun 2nd Jun 2013 06:43 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Alpha"
Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

That wasn't what I asked you about. Site problems is one of the reason they are switching in the first place.

Sites problems ? Switching ? Hey, are you telling me that Presto cannot cope with some web sites, so that's why Opera is changing of rendering engine ?

I told you that several web sites renders improperly under Opera, I provide proofs, and you're told me I'm a liar, that Presto is fabulous and compliant. I provide proofs, and you ditch them with a "That wasn't what I asked you about" ? Come on...

What YOU need to prove is that they are blaming the sites.

I said : come on... Whenever I'll proove you my words (and I know they're true) you'll quickly jump to another subject, like you just done. I pointed you the forum in which Opera developers claims users' fault. Of course it's not on the main page and the headlines. Learn to use the search option of the forum.

No they couldn't. You are incredibly ignorant.

They... couldn't ? Really ? That's one of a surprising answer. You mean, the less functional UI was able to, but the new shiny and expansive framwork cannot ? And I'm the one ignorant here ?

But back to the topic: You lied about Opera blaming the users, and you lied about Opera only blaming sites.

Nope, you're obviously the one jumping to conclusion twisting the reality, just show above. I never said "ONLY" blaming sites, some sites have their part at fault. But well, go as you wish, dices were already thrown, we'll see if Opera wins in the end...

Kochise

Edited 2013-06-02 06:49 UTC

Reply Score: 2

ggeldenhuys
Member since:
2006-11-13

This website viewed with Firefox 20 or with Chromium 25 shows rather different results. The second half of the effects only seem to work with Firefox, but not Chromium.

http://tympanus.net/Development/IconHoverEffects/

Having more rendering engines make it harder for web developers, but really it is the fault of the rendering engine developers. Thus it keeps everybody on there tows to make sure there implementations work as per certain standards.

Now if Opera didn't have the resources to keep working on their rendering engine and new Opera features, why not simply open source the rendering engine. That would have been much less work than what they did now.

Reply Score: 2